PDP-Feb06 Task force on Policies for Contractual Conditions: Existing TLDs
6 June 2006
Proposed agenda and documents
Task force members
Maureen Cubberley - Task Force Chair - Nominating Committee appointee
Marilyn Cade - CBUC
Alistair Dixon- CBUC
Greg Ruth - ISCPC
Antonio Harris - ISCPC
Jon Nevett - Registrars (Network Solutions)
Jeff Eckhaus - Registrars (Registrar .com)
Ken Stubbs - gTLD registries
David Maher - gTLD registries (PIR)
Cary Karp - gTLD registries
Paula Breuning - NCUC .
Milton Mueller - NCUC
Mawaki Chango - NCUC
Avri Doria - Nominating Committee appointee
Olof Nordling - Manager, Policy Development Coordination
Liz Williams - Senior Policy Counselor
Glen de Saint G�ry - GNSO Secretariat
GNSO Council Liaisons
Bret Fausett - ALAC Liaison
Ross Rader - Registrars
Mike Roberts - CBUC - apologies
Tony Holmes - ISCPC - apologies
Lucy Nichols - Intellectual Property Interests C - apologies
Ute Decker - Intellectual Property Interests C - apologies
Kiyoshi Tsuru - Intellectual Property Interests C
Sophia Bekele - Nominating Committee appointee
Please see materials attached in:
BC Comments on PDP on policies for contractual conditions.rtfd.zip
Brief summary from the chair
1. Confirmation of Agenda
2. Statement of Interest Update
3. Preliminary Taskforce Report discussion
4. Any other business
Item 1 Approval of the agenda.
Maureen Cubberley asked for a motion to approve the agenda.
Marilyn Cade requested that the issue of experts be discussed under Item 4: Any other Business
David Maher, seconded by Cary Karp moved for the adoption of the agenda
Decision 1: Agenda adopted
2. Statements of Interest update
Greg Ruth provided an updated statement of interest.
Paula Breuning stated that she had no interest in the issue under discussion and would provide a statement of interest.
David Maher requested that Marilyn Cade update her statement of interest.
Marilyn Cade stated that one of her clients, Overstock.com, was interested in single letter domain names and that this was known to the GNSO Council.
3. Preliminary Task force Report discussion
Maureen Cubberley referred to section C, Terms of Reference Responses, of the Preliminary Task Force Report and for a status update on the constituency statements.
The following Constituency statements were complete and approved by each constituency:
1. Registrar constituency
2. gTLD Registries constituency
3. Commercial and Business Users constituency (CBUC)
Marilyn Cade drew attention to an erratum in the CBUC statement, that Mr Hooker was not a member of the Commercial and Business Users constituency.
4. At the time of the meeting, the Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers constituency submitted their statement, complete and approved by the constituency.
Milton Mueller, for the Non Commercial Users Constituency, stated that additions would be made to their statement as they would consult with their members and other constituencies at the Marrakech ICANN meeting.
There was no statement from the Intellectual Property constituency.
Item 3. Preliminary Task Force Report discussion
Maureen Cubberley commented that there were a set of recommendations and the task force should examine whether any changes should be made to the terms of reference.
Marilyn Cade clarified that the CBUC did not agree with the heavy reliance made on the findings of the PDP 05 on new TLDs in the report, except in certain areas.
Maureen Cubberley agreed that it was a valid observation.
Liz Williams commented that while there were 2 separate PDPs closely related, they should be not be conflated, but it was desirable to have consistency between the underlying principles for existing and new TLDs.
Marilyn Cade, commented
"The BC is well aware that not all existing registry agreements share the same rights of renewal, however, we do not believe uniformity in this area is appropriate or necessary. We have noted that sponsored registries require special consideration, due to their role as in developing a community to support the launch of a TLD, the role in policy development and the delivery of services to the “sponsoring community”.
We do not support a “one size fits all” approach to this issue but would suggest that renewal terms within the different categories of TLDs should be consistent"
Maureen Cubberley commented that without making any foregone conclusions, any parallels and logical assumptions in the PDP Feb06 and the PDP Dec05 should be examined and urged the task force to consider whether the recommendations were comprehensive and reflected the views of the group.
Some constituencies expressed concern that there had not been adequate time to consider the report.
While there appeared to be general agreement to extend the time line and seek further input and expert opinion some task force members could not understand why the process needed to be prolonged and for how long.
Milton Mueller seconded by Marilyn Cade proposed:
that the PDP Feb 06 timeline be extended and the length of the extension be determined at the Marrakech meeting.
The motion passed with a voice vote. 13 votes
There was one vote not in favour.
Decision 1: that the PDP Feb 06 timeline be extended and the length of the extension be determined at the Marrakech meeting.
Maureen Cubberley, referring to recommendation 3
" It is recommended that the Task force undertake further discussion on whether to make a request to the GNSO Council to amend the Terms of Reference. Task force members may find the Deletes Task force report useful where the Task force provided recommendations on two of the four Terms of Reference. That report can be found http://www.gnso.icann.org/issues/deletes/report-final-17jun03.shtml"
stated that the Deletes Task Force served as a model to demonstrate that it was possible for a task force to redefine its terms of reference, and was rather a process point than a substantive point.
Marilyn Cade, speaking as a CBUC representative noted concern about revising the terms of reference until an effort has been made to work under them.
The CBUC did not support recommendation 1 "events have moved beyond the Terms of Reference" as it was very premature to be avoiding needed discussion, expert advice and debate which was the function of a policy organisation. If this was not undertaken, the GNSO could not provide the underpinning to ICANN's legitimacy.
Recommendation 1 was viewed as a factual statement rather than a recommendation and as such should not be included.
Ken Stubbs noted that consultation with the gTLD registries constituency was required before answering such a question.
Jon Nevett, chair of the Registrars constituency, commented that it was premature to reach consensus before substantive issues had been discussed.
Avri Doria, a nominating committee appointee, preferred to wait, before splitting issues off, until such time as there had been adequate discussion.
Bret Fausett gave an historical perspective on the short timelines and commented that similar discussions had taken place in the past and the suggestion at the time, that each policy development process should cross an in-person meeting to gather input, was considered very airien.
Liz Williams supported the usefulness of face to face meetings.
Clarification was requested on recommendation 4.
" It is recommended that the Task force notify that, with respect to some of the Terms of Reference, no policy is required (for example, in relation to Term of Reference 6) or where no consensus was possible. "
It was suggested that the language be modified to clarify the recommendation as it stands.
Milton Mueller commented on Recommendation 4 that there should be a distinction made between areas where policy was not needed and areas where there was no consensus as further deliberations could lead to a consensus position.
5. It is recommended that the Task force also:
a. Identify the types of registry data, beyond the commonly used registrant contact information, and that those concerned about registry data should clearly identify the types of data (with examples) to enable further discussion on the Terms of Reference
b. Get a better understanding of the definitions of market power and whether policy is required to guide whether ICANN needs to continue to have some role with respect to setting prices for existing TLDs. Outside expert advise would be useful
c. Refer to the ICANN Operating Plan and Budget which illustrates ICANN’s current funding model. A separate working group could be formed to analyse the existing funding model and the possibility of identifying alternate funding sources and whether that would have any policy impact
The NCUC wished to pursue recommendation 5a and 5b for clarification.
Marilyn Cade, referring to recommendation 5c ICANN fees, suggested a short tutorial on the funding model and the operational plan would be beneficial to the task force members and could perhaps form part of the Marrakech schedule.
Item 4: Any Other Business
4.1 The CBUC proposal on expert input favoured a series of conference calls with invited experts e.g. an independent economist, and any experts in the constituencies should be identified with specific topics and should speak as experts. The sessions should be well recorded and transcribed for future reference.
There was general agreement that experts were necessary and should be on the agenda for discussion in Marrakech.
- There would be a reiteration of the report to include the submissions from the CBUC and the ISPCPC as well as the conclusions on the recommendations arising from the current meeting.
- Submissions for changes to the wording in the draft report should be sent to Dr. Liz Williams before the end of the week, June 9, 2006
- An updated preliminary report would be released by June 16, 2006
- Maureen Cubberley, task force chair, will give a status report on the task force work to the GNSO Council via the council mailing list.
Saturday 24 June 2006 the PDP-Feb06 task force will meet in Marrakech at 13:00 local time in the GNSO working room.
Avri Doria proposed a motion of adjournment
Maureen Cubberley adjourned the meeting and thanked the participants.
Meeting adjourned at 22: 21 UTC. (00.21 CET)